Do you ever wonder about St Faustina?

[BarbaraTherese]

I think those passages from St. Faustina’s diary are about things that happen to souls during their lives, not necessarily at the hour of death.

I agree…I think opportunities and calls to repentence come many times during life…and while not necessarily at the hour of death, by the very same token, not necessarily not just before death. My hope and prayer is that at the second before death knowing death now is present, each soul is asked whom they choose, Heaven or Hell and do they repent and will do penance (purgatory) for all past sins? I might be wrong indeed, but such is my hope. I just cannot imagine being happy in Heaven knowing one soul is lost…but then it may be that souls will be lost and in Heaven I wont know or for some reason I cannot imagine, I will not care. But being merely human and limited it is my hope that no soul will be lost and it is my prayer. After all it is The Father’s desire that no soul be lost…and He is God!!! And what better disposition or prayer than that The Father’s Will (desire) be done. Amen.

Barb

 

[StMartin_67]

A “faulty translation” did not get a book put on the Index.

What was the objectional subject matter of the “faulty translation”? Does anybody know what it was?

 

[BarbaraTherese]

I didn’t use the term nor define it. I merely pointed out that it is dangerous to attribute a thought to “infused knowlege” when all the external indicators say otherwise.

Yes I grasped what you thought, but I cannot understand what you mean by “infused knowledge” nor “external indicators”…and probably my poverty indeed.

Barb

 

[BarbaraTherese]

She did record a conversation in her Diary #1485-1487 here, but unlike other witnessing through the Diary as being the actual words of Our Lord Jesus, these three conversations have no such authority as coming from Him, though I could be mistaken. It would have helped if St. Faustina was more specific as she was elsewhere in the Diary.

I believe these ‘conversations’ were the result of her own meditations upon God’s mercy, and what might possibly be His words to each of these types of souls. The only authentic wording she uses as coming from God is in 1698, which I provided earlier in this thread. It is important to note the use of her word “sometimes” and that is why I set it apart with apostrophes.

In conclusion, we cannot assume that God will absolutely without fail call each soul three times at the hour of death. I don’t know how this was presented on EWTN, but the listeners are mistaken if they take this as unerrant truth. I cherished this hope initially when I heard something similar from Fr. Groeschel, because I have family who did not die repentent, and this is why I began to read the Diary, in order to find the exact reference. There is nothing in the entire work that indicates every person will receive this grace at the hour of death, barring the possibility recorded in #1698.

The one consolation I had was when I prayed and learned that Our Blessed Mother prays for us at the hour of our death. If not, then the Hail Mary is just lip service. Pray for US SINNERS, which includes all of mankind, and is petitioned by the Church militant every day throughout the world. The prayer does not plead, pray for me at the hour of my death, but for all. As I mentioned earlier, this grace can also be rejected due to free will and there is no guarantee that one will therefore be saved just because Mary prays for US at the hour of OUR death.

And also that beautiful Fatima Prayer to Jesus at the end of each decade of The Rosary:

"Oh my Jesus, forgive us our sins and save us from the fires of Hell and

BRING ALL SOULS

TO HEAVEN, ESPECIALLY THOSE MOST IN NEED OF YOUR MERCY"

Indeed were the above words in any way misleading/theologically incorrect, The Church would instruct the Fatima Prayer to not be prayed, or to be altered.

And in the Diary of St. Faustina she states that Jesus said that the greatest of sinners are those who have most right to His Divine Mercy. I dont know where the passage may be as to reference, but I can dig it up if anyone wishes.

Blessings and regards…Barb

 

[StMartin_67]

Yes I grasped what you thought, but I cannot understand what you mean by “infused knowledge” nor “external indicators”…and probably my poverty indeed.

Barb

What I mean is that if you know someone very well, and they, by all external indicators, died in a state of manifest unrepentant mortal sin; and then you thought you received a “inspiration” that they were actually not lost, you wouldn’t attribute it to “infused knowledge”. Instead you might be moved to make reparation for them, offer prayers for them, etc.

Assuming that you received some “infused knowlege” is prideful and therefore likely inspired by the devil rather than God.

 

[BarbaraTherese]

The question was why it was placed on the Index. The abolition of the Index does not answer that question; but I assume you knew that.

Do you know why it was placed on the Index of Forbidden Books?

In pointing out the Index itself was now suppressed, I said it more for the benefit of those reading the thread who perhaps may not understand that it no longer exists. And no, it does not answer your intrinsic question - Carole was correct to my research that the translation the Holy Office had which led to the suppression of the diary was faulty and when this was amended, the theological problems that had existed no longer did.
Although I will point out that the National Catholic Reporter continued to insist, again to my research, that there were questionable matters still even in the amended translation, although that is merely a media outlet opinion and the media of all kinds do like conflicts and ‘stirring’ as it sells well and attracts interest and readers - I take as transcending that by far, that opinion that Rome shares with us and what she infact proclaims to the faithful re St. Faustina and her diaries, and I should think any Catholic with half a brain would do likewise. Media being simply media in the main - although and again, where there is smoke there can be fire. I am not exactly a great fan of media in case it is missed I studied Modern History and our tutor made source reliability a whole subject within that subject and it was absolutely fascinating.

Blessings and regards…Barb

 

[StMartin_67]

And also that beautiful Fatima Prayer to Jesus at the end of each decade of The Rosary:

Indeed were the above words in any way misleading/theologically incorrect, The Church would instruct the Fatima Prayer to not be prayed, or to be altered.

And in the Diary of St. Faustina she states that Jesus said that the greatest of sinners are those who have most right to His Divine Mercy. I dont know where the passage may be as to reference, but I can dig it up if anyone wishes.

Blessings and regards…Barb

The Fatima Prayer was never on the Index.

Now, why was the Diary of Sr. Faustina placed on the Index?

 

[BarbaraTherese]

A “faulty translation” did not get a book put on the Index. What was the objectional subject matter of the “faulty translation”?

Apparently to my research a faulty translation did get the diaries put on the Index. Since you have a computer, have you thought of googling “diary of faustina - index of forbidden books” or similar. I tried this but I am only a real amateur with computers, and I came up with the faulty translation explanation.

If you try to research what you are stating, you may come up with some references to share to support your statement that faulty translation does not get a book put on the Index. I sure would be interested in such a reference and research and contrary explantion.

All in goodwill

Regards…Barb

 

[BarbaraTherese]

A “faulty translation” did not get a book put on the Index.

What was the objectional subject matter of the “faulty translation”? Does anybody know what it was?

What you are saying does not make sense in any way whatsoever. If you can state categorically that a faulty translation did not get the diaries on the Index, you must surely know what did at least remotely?

Obviously if the translation in the hands of The Holy Office was incorrect, then the information in the translation could well also be incorrect and it seems this was so once the translation was amended. I cannot grasp your reasoning at all, since you seem to have no idea why the diaries were put on the Index - just does not make sense to me…Barb

 

[StMartin_67]

Apparently to my research a faulty translation did get the diaries put on the Index. Since you have a computer, have you thought of googling “diary of faustina - index of forbidden books” or similar. I tried this but I am only a real amateur with computers, and I came up with the faulty translation explanation.

If you try to research what you are stating, you may come up with some references to share to support your statement that faulty translation does not get a book put on the Index. I sure would be interested in such a reference and research and contrary explantion.

All in goodwill

Regards…Barb

What was the objectional subject matter of the “faulty translation”? There is this vague reference to a faulty translation; a faulty translation of what specifically?

What was the specific problem(s) that got it placed on the Index of Forbidden Books?

 

[BarbaraTherese]

I try to check my sources and the following seems to be reliable. It has a cardinal as patron and quite a few priests as regular authors. Can one take that as a guarantee of reliable source, I dont think so today - one can only hope so. But I really think it is up to StMartin to prove his theory that an incorrect translation would not have earned a place on the Index. I feel I have done my best to state that in the case of Faustina, an incorrect translation (in support of Joysong incidentally) did so effect…and I have given my sources of information, whereas StMartin has given none for his disagreement hence his or her personal opinion only and a personal opinion only is not at all a realiable source where disagreements are concerned. This does not mean that such personal opinion is not correct, merely that there is no apparent way of discerning whether it is correct or not.

motherofallpeoples.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=664&Itemid=40

1. The 1966 statement of the Holy Office that the “Index retains its moral force despite its dissolution” may call the Catholic reader to special diligence and discernment in examining works previously found on the Index. However, this should not be inappropriately extended to support a conclusion that reading any work previously placed on the Index would still presently constitute a formal act of disobedience, as if an Index of Forbidden Books was still in full operational existence and force.

Similar reasoning could lead to the mistaken concept of a continued “moral binding force” for books previously prohibited by competent ecclesiastical authorities and later fully exonerated, imprimatured, and promulgated by the ecclesiastical authorities.

An excellent example of this is the prohibition of St. Faustina Kowalska’s diary, Divine Mercy in My Soul, by ecclesiastical authorities, which was later granted the Imprimatur and full Church approval. (5)

 

[BarbaraTherese]

What was the objectional subject matter of the “faulty translation”? There is this vague reference to a faulty translation; a faulty translation of what specifically?

What was the specific problem(s) that got it placed on the Index of Forbidden Books?

I dont believe this! Surely you jest!:banghead: …a faulty translation of the diaries, what else could it be! Apparently the good sisters in the convent of St. Faustina after her death made amendments to the diaries later recognized as not Faustina’s handwriting whereas the Holy Office initially took the amendments as those of St. Faustina.
Other than that, please do your own research to support your opinion. I disagree with your opinion and have given my sources.

Perhaps you are only a learner with computers?

Barb

 

[BarbaraTherese]

What I mean is that if you know someone very well, and they, by all external indicators, died in a state of manifest unrepentant mortal sin; and then you thought you received a “inspiration” that they were actually not lost, you wouldn’t attribute it to “infused knowledge”. Instead you might be moved to make reparation for them, offer prayers for them, etc.

Assuming that you received some “infused knowlege” is prideful and therefore likely inspired by the devil rather than God.

I am afraid I am at that point where I find it difficult to put faith in your opinions, unless you can give references to support it. No one can know whether a soul has died in mortal sin or not - it is absolutely impossible as assured knowledge. Aside from infused knowledge and I really must confess that insofar as I am concerned infused knowledge is a term of mystical theology not personal experience in that I would claim that my own experiences are within the strict mystical theolgy defintion of “infused knowledge”.
Where a person had lacked peace over the salvation of a certain soul, could God give that person Peace over and above all that was humanly known of that person…of course He could!!!..and if in doubt the way to travel is to speak to one’s director or to a priest about it. A discussion board is not exactly reliable re spiritual discernment - a potential indicator perhaps only.

.

 

[BarbaraTherese]

The Fatima Prayer was never on the Index.

Now, why was the Diary of Sr. Faustina placed on the Index?

The Fatima Prayer was never on the Index.

…http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/4/4_1_72.gif…

Now, why was the Diary of Sr. Faustina placed on the Index?/

Your problem, my dear SM…I dont have one - not with the Diaries anyway

Re the title of this thread. I will never have problems with St. Faustina and the diaries again after all my research - thank you to our Opening Poster…
…never with Faustina and her diaries anyway!http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/29/29_2_4.gif

.

.

 

[BarbaraTherese]

What did fascinate me was that the diaries of St. Faustina were changed by her sisters in religion and then forwarded to the Vatican in support of a cause for canonization i.e. false pretenses…and this has happened in the case of a few of our saints (writings altered by those advocating her cause). How can any Catholic, especiallly religious, put forward something false as a case for a cause to be introduced i.e. false pretenses or fraud.

.

 

[StMartin_67]

I am afraid I am at that point where I find it difficult to put faith in your opinions, unless you can give references to support it. No one can know whether a soul has died in mortal sin or not - it is absolutely impossible as assured knowledge. Aside from infused knowledge and I really must confess that insofar as I am concerned infused knowledge is a term of mystical theology not personal experience in that I would claim that my own experiences are within the strict mystical theolgy defintion of “infused knowledge”.
Where a person had lacked peace over the salvation of a certain soul, could God give that person Peace over and above all that was humanly known of that person…of course He could!!!..and if in doubt the way to travel is to speak to one’s director or to a priest about it. A discussion board is not exactly reliable re spiritual discernment - a potential indicator perhaps only.

.

BarbaraTherese:

No one can know whether a soul has died in mortal sin or not - it is absolutely impossible as assured knowledge.

They can know with moral certainty, not absolute certainty. The same way we can know (with moral certainty) that a soul departed this world in a state of grace. Didn’t you know that, Barbara?

 

[BarbaraTherese]

They can know with moral certainty, not absolute certainty. The same way we can know (with moral certainty) that a soul departed this world in a state of grace. Didn’t you know that, Barbara?

Yes I know the theological definition of moral and absolute certainly - start a separate thread if you wish to discuss it. I dont.

 

[Joysong]

StMartin,

You seem to have a morose preoccupation with the reasons for the Diary originally being on the index, and I suspect the explanation of an originally bad translation will not satisfy your curiosity. It is information that the public is not privy to, and if you insist on learning the details, you will have to contact the Vatican directly.

Pope John Paul II and the universal Church rejoiced exceedingly on the occasion of her canonization, and subsequently rejoiced that her Spiritual Director, Father Michał Sopoćko who directed her to write her visions in a diary, was beatified this year in September.
Vatican:

The mission of the Blessed Sr. Mary Faustina was recorded in her Diary which she kept at the specific request of the Lord Jesus and her confessors. In it, she recorded faithfully all of the Lord Jesus’ wishes and also described the encounters between her soul and Him. Secretary of My most profound mystery — the Lord Jesus said to Sr. Faustina — know that your task is to write down everything that I make known to you about My mercy, for the benefit of those who by reading these things will be comforted in their souls and will have the courage to approach Me (Diary 1693). In an extraordinary way, Sr. Mary Faustina’s work sheds light on the mystery of the Divine Mercy. It delights not only the simple and uneducated people, but also scholars who look upon it as an additional source of theo-logical research. The Diary has been translated into many languages, among others, English, German, Italian, Spanish, French, Portuguese, Arabic, Russian, Hungarian, Czech and Slovak.

In addition to being translated into many languages, the work now has both the Nihil Obstat and Imprimatur. Whatever the Diary was purported to be at one time, it is no longer existent. The only conclusion I can form is that you are resisting the grace of God to accept this as His work, and pridefully demanding hidden information that the Church has prudently withheld. You are free to hold onto your resistance. The rest of us rejoice with the Church that God has granted this wonderful gift to mankind.

 

[StMartin_67]

joysong:

StMartin,

You seem to have a morose preoccupation with the reasons for the Diary originally being on the index, and I suspect the explanation of an originally bad translation will not satisfy your curiosity. It is information that the public is not privy to, and if you insist on learning the details, you will have to contact the Vatican directly.

Being placed on the Index of forbidden Books was a very serious censure for a particular book. The Index was reserved for books containing either immoral or heretical content. Since there was obviously no immoral content in the diary, there must have been some serious theological error; otherwise it would not have been placed on the Index of Forbidden Books.

It appears that the diary was considered suspect (and therefore suppressed) under Pope Pius XII. This suppression was not only upheld by Pope John XXIII, but was also placed on the Index of Forbidden Books under Bl. Pope John XXIII.

If you doubt the seriousness of being placed on the Index, read the excerpt from Catholic Encyclopedia on the subject:

newadvent.org/cathen/07721a.htm

Index of Prohibited Books

The Index of Prohibited Books, or simply “Index”, is used in a restricted sense to signify the exact list or catalogue of books, the reading of which was once forbidden to Catholics by the highest ecclesiastical authority. This list formed the second and larger part of the codex entitled “Index librorum prohibitorum”, which contained the entire ecclesiastical legislation relating to books. (The “Index librorum prohibitorum”, as an integrant part of the prohibition of books, has already been dealt with in the article CENSORSHIP OF BOOKS.)

A book was prohibited or put on the Index by decree of the Sacred Congregation of the Roman Inquisition, of the Sacred Office, or of the Index, which decree though approved by the pope (in formâ communi), always remained a purely congregational decree. It need scarcely be mentioned that the pope alone, without having recourse to any of the congregations, could put a book on the Index, either by issuing a Bull or a Brief, or in any other way. Formerly it was the rule that a book was examined by one of the Roman Congregations only after complaint had been made to Rome. With regard to the Congregation of the Index, however, Pius X, when reorganizing the Roman Curia by the Constitution “Sapienti consilio” (29 June, 1908), decreed as follows:

Henceforth it will be the task of this Sacred Congregation not only to examine carefully the books denounced to it, to prohibit them if necessary, and to grant permission for reading forbidden books, but also to supervise, ex officio, books that are being published, and to pass sentence on such as deserve to be prohibited. Its further task is to remind the bishops of their sacred duty to combat the publication of pernicious writings and give information about them to the Apostolic See, in accordance with the Constitution Officiorum ad munerum of 25 January, 1897 (Acta S. Sedis, XLI, 432).

In the reorganization of the Roman Congregations, Pius X did not change the constitution or methods of the Congregation of the Index, but rather confirmed anew Leo XIII’s Bull “Officiorum”, together with Benedict XIV’s “Sollicitae provida” sanctioned therein. This Bull of Benedict XIV, published on 8 July, 1753, regulated in detail the procedure of the Roman Congregations in the examination of pernicious books. It strictly commanded that the examination of a book be entrusted only to revisors well versed in the particular language and branch of learning. They were to be free from all partisanship and prejudice, and had to pass judgment not according to their private predilections or the tenets of any school but simply and solely according to the general Catholic teaching and the dogmas of Holy Church.

Especially when examining books of Catholic authors of merit, they were to allow them free circulation, if at all possible, in a spirit of fairness and leniency. In no case was the book of a Catholic author to be condemned on the strength of the verdict of one revisor, not even when all the consultors agreed with him. Together with the report of the first revisor — who remained anonymous — the book was given to another for a second revision, and only when the second revisor’s verdict was in agreement with that of the first were both reports referred to the cardinals for final decision. If, however, the second revisor thought that the book ought not to be prohibited, a third would examine both verdicts as well as the book itself, but without knowing the names of the other revisors. If the opinion of the third coincided with that of the first and with the general vote of the consultors, the case could be passed on to the cardinals. Otherwise the consultors were again to give their votes, whereupon the matter would be put before the cardinals for final decision.

 

[Joysong]

You are determined to find fault, even though the Church has removed all of the former stigma when the correct translation of Faustina’s actual wrilting was examined and approved. Do you know what an imprimatur means? Nothing is found to be theologically objectionable against faith or morals. Now let’s drop this banal argument, because you are truly arguing against the Church Herself with your objections.

As I suggested, why not write to the Vatican and insist they provide the reason to you that the original faulty version was not approved, as if it makes a whit of logic to know what once WAS, and no longer IS objectionable. While you’re at it, ask them to tell you which demons Mary Magdalene was delivered from.